Prepare answers for the following questions. Your group has 45 minutes to complete this. For question number three consider using the internet. Your answers are to be uploaded.
1. Many scientists argue that the rainforest ecosystem should be considered a trust of humanity, similar to the status of Antarctica and the oceans. Does this sentiment conflict with our notion of national sovereignty? In other words, who should control the Amazon rainforest?
Yes, this sentiment conflicts with the notion of national sovereignty. However, due to the fact that rainforest destruction affects the whole world’s environment, the control of the Amazon rainforest should be left to a universal organization such as the United Nations. It is true that the Amazon rainforest is located in South America but since the Amazon rainforest functions as the “lungs of the world”, the sovereignty of control should not be left over to South America alone. However, the control should not be in a way of forbidding destruction but limiting destruction. Universal organizations should cooperate with governments of South American countries to save the rainforests.
2. Note that Brazil’s carbon dioxide emissions per capital from fossil fuel consumption were 9 percent of U.S. contributions per capita in 2004. In light of their (your) high levels of consumption and their (your) past destruction of much of America’s forest, do they (you) have the right to protest the policies of Brazil?
Even if Brazil’s consumption rate is lower than ours, we still do have the right to protest the policies of Brazil. The Amazon rainforest practically determines the carbon dioxide level of the world so it is the matter of the world and the concern of the whole world; not an individual country. It is true that we consume more energy and resources than Brazil but that does not make us unable to protest against their policy. Brazil also has the right to protest against our policies that are ruining Earth.
3. How does the United States contribute to the destruction of the rainforest (e.g., role of American trans- national corporations, demand in the United States for wood, beef, and other agricultural products, etc.)? What role should the United States play, if any, in addressing this issue?
United States’ economy includes lots of multinational and national corporations such as McDonalds. These multinational corporations are supported by multiple factories and require enormous amounts of resources and energies to sustain such corporations. These resources and energy requirements are sometimes met by obtaining trees, minerals, and other sources of energy from the Amazon rainforest or other rainforests. Due to such great needs, United States destroys the rainforest the most. They consume the most beef and other agricultural products to support their national and multinational corporations.
NOT DONE!!!
Prepare answers for the following questions. Your group has 45 minutes to complete this. For question number three consider using the internet. Your answers are to be uploaded.
1. Many scientists argue that the rainforest ecosystem should be considered a trust of humanity, similar to the status of Antarctica and the oceans. Does this sentiment conflict with our notion of national sovereignty? In other words, who should control the Amazon rainforest?
Yes, this sentiment conflicts with the notion of national sovereignty. However, due to the fact that rainforest destruction affects the whole world’s environment, the control of the Amazon rainforest should be left to a universal organization such as the United Nations. It is true that the Amazon rainforest is located in South America but since the Amazon rainforest functions as the “lungs of the world”, the sovereignty of control should not be left over to South America alone. However, the control should not be in a way of forbidding destruction but limiting destruction. Universal organizations should cooperate with governments of South American countries to save the rainforests.
2. Note that Brazil’s carbon dioxide emissions per capital from fossil fuel consumption were 9 percent of U.S. contributions per capita in 2004. In light of their (your) high levels of consumption and their (your) past destruction of much of America’s forest, do they (you) have the right to protest the policies of Brazil?
Even if Brazil’s consumption rate is lower than ours, we still do have the right to protest the policies of Brazil. The Amazon rainforest practically determines the carbon dioxide level of the world so it is the matter of the world and the concern of the whole world; not an individual country. It is true that we consume more energy and resources than Brazil but that does not make us unable to protest against their policy. Brazil also has the right to protest against our policies that are ruining Earth.
3. How does the United States contribute to the destruction of the rainforest (e.g., role of American trans- national corporations, demand in the United States for wood, beef, and other agricultural products, etc.)? What role should the United States play, if any, in addressing this issue?
United States’ economy includes lots of multinational and national corporations such as McDonalds. These multinational corporations are supported by multiple factories and require enormous amounts of resources and energies to sustain such corporations. These resources and energy requirements are sometimes met by obtaining trees, minerals, and other sources of energy from the Amazon rainforest or other rainforests. Due to such great needs, United States destroys the rainforest the most. They consume the most beef and other agricultural products to support their national and multinational corporations.